why was there Jesus

[kidsagainstkows]

my question is simple. Why was Jesus necessary?

perhaps the question needs more explanation than that...

i always heard, when i was a christian, that Jesus basically took the place of yearly animal sacrifices done by the jews. because Jesus died for humanity, now we dont have to sacrifice animals for our sins.

if that is the case why did God use Jesus? why didnt he just say "no more animal sacs. just ask forgiveness and your good".

 

[Supreme]

my question is simple. Why was Jesus necessary?

perhaps the question needs more explanation than that...

i always heard, when i was a christian, that Jesus basically took the place of yearly animal sacrifices done by the jews. because Jesus died for humanity, now we dont have to sacrifice animals for our sins.

if that is the case why did God use Jesus? why didnt he just say "no more animal sacs. just ask forgiveness and your good".

I think you believe Jesus was a creation: no no no no no no. Jesus wasn't 'created' by the Father, Jesus IS God stepping into His own creation. He's necessary because without Jesus, there is no creation. I think the better question would be 'Why did Jesus sacrifice Himself', although you answered that already. Because animal rights groups were very upset.

God gave the Jewish people customs and instead of destroying those customs, He gave humanity Himself in Jesus, in order that they may be 'ever seeing but never percieving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!' (Mark 4:12)

 

[Emmy]

Dear kidsagainstkows. You know that Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden with God, and they were good. Until temptation, in the guise of a Serpent, turned them into disobedient people. Instead of listening to God`s advice: Not to eat fruit of the Tree of knowledge, they believed the lying Serpent, and did what God asked them Not to do. They paid the consequences, and were sent away from God, to Earth. On Earth, Adam and Eve, and all who came after them, did follow their selfish and wilfull characters, and moved farther and farther away from God. In time Jesus, the promised Messiah came to show us God as He really is, our loving Heavenly Father who wants us back again. BUT we had to become loving and trusting sons and daughters, to be forgiven of our many sins and wrongdoings. But sadly there was NOBODY without sins, and God`s Holy Law demanded an absolutely innocent sacrifice. Jesus, born of woman, was the ONLY Sinless sacrifice on this Earth. Jesus died that we might live, and Jesus died out of love for all of us. Jesus became the Sacrifice which reconciled us to God. And now we have to become as God wants us to be. Jesus paid for all our sins and transgressions, and we are free now to Repent, to exchange our selfish and wilfull character into loving God with all our hearts, souls and minds, and loving our neighbour, all others, friend or foe, As we love ourselves. We have years to get better, we have Jesus to help and guide us, and we have God to forgive us, as we forgive each other. I say this humbly and with love, kidsagainstkows. Greetings from Emmy, your sister in Christ.

 

[ebia]

my question is simple. Why was Jesus necessary?

perhaps the question needs more explanation than that...

i always heard, when i was a christian, that Jesus basically took the place of yearly animal sacrifices done by the jews. because Jesus died for humanity, now we dont have to sacrifice animals for our sins.

if that is the case why did God use Jesus? why didnt he just say "no more animal sacs. just ask forgiveness and your good".

Saying "I forgive you" is good, but it doesn't deal with the problem.
The trouble with your question is it is set against the wrong picture of what the Christian story is all about.

It's not about "We are naughty and God needs to forgive us so we can go somewhere nice when we die" but "our failure messes up the world so that there is suffering and death, and God wants to put that right so that evil, suffering and death are done away with and all creation can be redeemed and restored".

To that end Jesus took all the consequence of misdoing upon himself, let evil do its worst to him, and came through that and out the other side in the Resurrection. By doing that evil was de-powered once and for all. All of that needs to be finally consumated at the final resurrection and judgement. We live between those two times, in a New Creation that has begun but is not complete, with a vocation to be part of New Creation coming to fullness, in the process becoming ourselves part of New Creation - made fit for the world to come.

 

[aiki]

my question is simple. Why was Jesus necessary?

perhaps the question needs more explanation than that...

i always heard, when i was a christian, that Jesus basically took the place of yearly animal sacrifices done by the jews. because Jesus died for humanity, now we dont have to sacrifice animals for our sins.

if that is the case why did God use Jesus? why didnt he just say "no more animal sacs. just ask forgiveness and your good".

Because:

1). The wages of sin is death. (Ro. 6:23)
2). For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. There is none righteous, no, not one. (Ro. 3:23; 3:10)
3). The carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God. (Ro. 8:7)
4.) For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness, for the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God. (He. 7:18-19)
5). But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation. Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.
For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. (He. 9:11-15)

Sin must have a just consequence, a punishment; God could not be a holy, just God and allow sin to exist unpunished. Thus, God instituted the Law of Sin and Death: He who sins, dies. Because our sin is always ultimately against an infinite, holy, perfect God it deserves an everlasting punishment, which we know as Hell. However, God is also loving and merciful and made a way for us to escape the terrible and eternal consequence of our sin against Him. But He couldn't do this without fulfilling the necessary requirements of His own holiness and justice: Someone would have to pay with their life for our sin. That someone who would pay our sin-debt for us had to be perfect, he had to be sinless, in order that the sacrifice might pay for all sin forever. Only God could meet the standard of holy perfection necessary to satisfy the demands of His holy and just Law. So, the Bible tells us, "He took on flesh and dwelt among us" and sacrificed Himself on a cross to free us from the penalty of our own sin.

Peace.

 

[salida]

This is why Jesus is necessary. Are you a good person? The Good Test Can you keep the 10 Commandments all the time 100% of the time? Only Jesus could.

Yes, he did take the place of animal sacrifices who just covered sins. Jesus was the perfect sacrifice that takes away sins.

 

[Christos Anesti]

As Saint Athanasius said : "God became man so that man could become god". Christ took on our nature to glorify it and unite it to Himself.

 

[freeport]

my question is simple. Why was Jesus necessary?

perhaps the question needs more explanation than that...

i always heard, when i was a christian, that Jesus basically took the place of yearly animal sacrifices done by the jews. because Jesus died for humanity, now we dont have to sacrifice animals for our sins.

if that is the case why did God use Jesus? why didnt he just say "no more animal sacs. just ask forgiveness and your good".

So there could be children of Jesus, children of God...

God came to earth so we could go to Heaven.

 

[kidsagainstkows]

thanks for your replies, ill attempt to answer each one in kind.

in reguards to Supreme . Why wouldn't God destroy Jewish customs if he decided that they would be no longer necessary? why the huge work around? it doesnt seem to make since to me.

Emmy: truefully, i have always seen the fall story to be about sex. tree of "knowledge", eating of the "fruit", eve tempted by the "snake". but anyways your post still doesnt answer why God didnt just say your forgiven. also, thank you for speaking with love, it made my day .

Ebia: why does somebody have to pay with their life? doesnt god set the rules? cant he just create or abolish them as he/she/it pleases? i know answering questions with questions is a terrible practice but i truly dont understand what the using a loophole to abolish the rule when you can just abolish the rule with no consequences.

Saida: i dont think anyone could say that they are good in Jesus standards "thinking badly of someone is murder" ect. i do however think that i am a good and useful member of society. i could argue that Jesus himself did sin in the gospels. he threw tables when the market was in the temple, he called Peter Satan, he forsook his family. do u think he wasnt angry with the market people and the church when he did that? do you think he wasnt angered at peter when jesus called him Satan? all of this still doesnt answer the question of why God used Jesus and didnt just abolish the rule.

Christos Anesti: why? there are plenty of examples that god could have lifted up who lived well before Jesus and probably at the time too. there was Moses, Noah, Josh, David, and getting away from the christian faith, Plato, Homer, Socrates, and many others. did all of these people sin? Most certainly, but does that take away from the great things that they did? not at all.

Freeport: why did God wait so long before he decided he wanted people in heaven (if no people went there before Jesus)? God creates something and 4,000 years into it (yay YEC) he decides he wants people up there with him? and he doesnt just say "come on up", he does this huge workaround loophole to do it. im also proud of myself for not saying Jesus had children? (whoops just said it).

I look forward to your responses

I leave you with a parable

A family had one son. when that son was old enough they decided to remove his curfew. however, instead of just removing the curfew they decided to have another kid, convince the son that the kid was them reincarnate, wait thirty years, kill the kid, and now the son doesnt have a curfew... or they could have just removed the freakin thing.

 

[ebia]

Ebia: why does somebody have to pay with their life? doesnt god set the rules? cant he just create or abolish them as he/she/it pleases? i know answering questions with questions is a terrible practice but i truly dont understand what the using a loophole to abolish the rule when you can just abolish the rule with no consequences.

I'm not sure what rule you think you can abolish without consequence. You seem to assume that "the rules" (I'm not quite sure what rules you are thinking of) are entirely arbitrary and pointless when the whole point of Genesis 3-5 is that suffering and death are what happens when we don't act the way we are meant to act.

As for "paying with one's life", think you need to move away from the punishment mode of looking at things. If one's behaviour is corrupting and damaging to the rest of creation ultimately one has to choose between being transformed by following Jesus or being excluded so that the rest of creation can be put right. What that exclusion might look like isn't something Scripture dwells on a lot, but two ideas that do a good job of making sense of it are CS Lewis's narrative picture in The Great Divorce (well worth reading) and Tom Wright's suggestion that, since we become like that which we worship, ultimately anyone who chooses not to worship God inevitably becomes less and less like the image of God until they are no longer human in any meaningful sense.

I leave you with a parable

A family had one son. when that son was old enough they decided to remove his curfew. however, instead of just removing the curfew they decided to have another kid, convince the son that the kid was them reincarnate, wait thirty years, kill the kid, and now the son doesnt have a curfew... or they could have just removed the freakin thing.

Your parable simply doesn't understand what the thing is about - as is demonstrated by where you end. Resurrection changed the world.

It's that resurrection that is the climax of Israel's purpose that means that all the rules designed for keeping Israel apart and as God's people have served their purpose.

One think I think you may be missing that you need is remembering who Jesus was. We live in a world that talks about Jesus as God so much the rest gets forgotten. Jesus own claim wasn't focused on that at all, but on his humanity and Jewishness. Jesus as Messiah isn't Jesus as God but Jesus as annointed King, and the King (in Jewish thinking) is the representative of his people. What happens to the King happens to Israel and vice versa, and Israel's role is to represent all humanity, and humanity's role is to represent all creation.

Jesus is Israel's coming of age (in your parable) and his death and resurrection is the event that enables Israel and all humanity to take responsibility for their own actions - providing they appropriate that death and resurrection for themselves as part of the People of God.

 

[kidsagainstkows]

thank you for your thoughtful response.

in reguards to your first paragraph i was referring to behavior related rules that God gave people (specifically animal sacrifice). also im not sure why we have the ability to do bad things if God doesnt want us to, but thats for another thread.

the reason why i talked about abolishing the rule without consequence is analogous to if i created my own game, and when i decided that a rule didnt work or was unnecessary, i just abolish the rule without consequence.

i dont understand what the resurrection has to do with it except for that that is the actual loophole god used to get around the animal sac thing. i understand that the resurrection is the most important thing to the Christian belief (i highly encourage you to read the passion story in columns i.e. read gethsemine (sp) in the four gospels and move on reading each section in each gospel) . what i do not know is why that means anything. Jesus certainly wasnt the first person to be resurrected, nor was he the last.

 

[ebia]

thank you for your thoughtful response.

in reguards to your first paragraph i was referring to behavior related rules that God gave people (specifically animal sacrifice). also im not sure why we have the ability to do bad things if God doesnt want us to, but thats for another thread.

the reason why i talked about abolishing the rule without consequence is analogous to if i created my own game, and when i decided that a rule didnt work or was unnecessary, i just abolish the rule without consequence.

1. A game needs a set of rules. One can tweak those rules, but as a set they are necessary to make the game the game.
2. You are still looking at the thing the wrong way around. The resurrection didn't happen to abolish the rules, the rules were there to get the people of God to the resurrection.

i dont understand what the resurrection has to do with it except for that that is the actual loophole god used to get around the animal sac thing. i understand that the resurrection is the most important thing to the Christian belief (i highly encourage you to read the passion story in columns i.e. read gethsemine (sp) in the four gospels and move on reading each section in each gospel) . what i do not know is why that means anything. Jesus certainly wasnt the first person to be resurrected, nor was he the last.

Um, yes he was. Other people raised from the dead were not resurrected; they came back from death to die again. Jesus came through death once and for all, defeating death and anticipating and making possible the final resurrection of all at the end of the age. It's not by accident that John's account emphasis the garden and says twice that it's the first day of the week - Easter morning was the first day of New Creation, the course of everything has changed. Death and suffering is still hanging on until the final completion of that New Creation, but it's power has been defeated.

The whole purpose of keeping the Jewish people separate up to that point was to bring things to a climax in Jesus' death and resurrection - that's what all the Torah was about. Everything having narrowed down onto Jesus, and him having died and risen, the object is to open that out, to draw everyone into him and his resurrection, so Torah would actually be counter-productive.

 

[Joveia]

Let's say you have a thief who keeps stealing some guy's stuff. The guy is so nice that whenever the thief steals from him, he forgives the thief. But the thief never changes his behaviour. This nice guy can forgive the thief all he wants, but it doesn't deal with the thief's wrongdoing. Forgiving the thief doesn't make the thief a better person.

In the same way, without Jesus dying for our sins, God's forgiveness wouldn't have made us much better people. It would have been like the guy forgiving the thief who keeps stealing.

Because going to heaven involves meeting God's standards, then God's forgiveness without Jesus dying for us would have been useless. And we can't repent and meet God's standards on our own, because we always fail to repent perfectly.

Somehow, Jesus dying for us makes Christians perfect in the life to come. I'm not exactly sure how. I think if one looks at Romans 6:3-10 one can get some ideas. I think that through a mystical union the believer and his/her sin was made to die on the cross with Jesus. And in the life to come believers will be 'clothed' with the perfect intentions towards others that Christ had, so they will meet God's standards by being 'in' Christ. I think something like this might be how it works.

 

[kidsagainstkows]

Buddah did not die, he achieved nirvana and left the world in a ball of light

neither did Mohammad, he rode a winged creature (similer to a griffin from greek mythology) straight to heaven.

many religions have someone ascending directly to their version of heaven, why do reject these claims but accept the Jesus one.

also to jovia, do you think that we are better people? there are still thieves who steal repeatedly and other sinners.

i, for example, do believe that we are better people today than we were in the bronze age, but thats not because of Jesus, its because we as a society have been better able to discover what is right and wrong. if the day after jesus came back everything was rainbows and sunshine it would be different, but thats not how it was. it wasnt until the renaissance (the first rise of secularism) that things became markedly better for people.

 

[ebia]

Buddah did not die, he achieved nirvana and left the world in a ball of light

neither did Mohammad, he rode a winged creature (similer to a griffin from greek mythology) straight to heaven.

From my limited understanding Mohammed did die - his ascension was not at the end of his life.

many religions have someone ascending directly to their version of heaven, why do reject these claims but accept the Jesus one.

Because the Resurrection is different - it's a unique idea, not a common one like ascension and therefore not one that would be made up, and because it is central. The resurrection is something completely unexpected and something that caused, in less than 20 years, the first of Jesus followers to completely change the way they thought about everything else and the way they lived their life in its light. Resurrection in early Christianity isn't just a happy ending to Jesus story, its the event on which everything else is built.

You simply do not get that kind of thing - a central claim that is an historical event and is completely incongrous with all the contemporty thinking - in other religions. Ascension of Elisha, Mary, Mohammed, Budda ... are not central events in the way Resurrection is, do not overturn all current thinking about death in the way resurrection does, and for the most part took a heck of a lot longer than 20 years to develop and become widespread in their faiths.

also to jovia, do you think that we are better people? there are still thieves who steal repeatedly and other sinners.

i, for example, do believe that we are better people today than we were in the bronze age, but thats not because of Jesus, its because we as a society have been better able to discover what is right and wrong. if the day after jesus came back everything was rainbows and sunshine it would be different, but thats not how it was. it wasnt until the renaissance (the first rise of secularism) that things became markedly better for people.

From the very first Greco-Roman critics of Christianity noted how insanely moral the Christians were. Comments about how they not only looked after their own sick (itself unheard of) but actually looked after other people's sick as well! One of the big attractions that drew people to early Christianity was precisely the different way that they lived that was so much at odds with the norms of the world in which existed.

 

[Jazmyn]

God put the tree in the garden and said to Adam and Eve, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." (Genesis 2:16-17) So Adam and Eve knew that the wages of sin was death.

Eve was tempted by the devil, who came in the form of a serpent, and ate of the tree, then persuaded her husband to eat of it.

Because God being God in His very nature cannot lie or be unjust, Adam and Eve had to receive the penalty for their sins - death.

Before Jesus came, God set up an illustration of the future, where for the forgiveness of sins, an animal could die in the place of the sinner, the animal had to be blemishless (representing sinlessness), this fulfilled the requirement of the penalty of sin - which is death. Although these sacrifices could not clear the conscience of the worshipper.

When the time was right, God sent His Son into the world, Jesus, to pay the penalty for our sins once and for all, by dying in our place, so that through Him we might obtain forgiveness. He went into heaven itself, to appear for us in God's presence, just like the high priest entered the Most Holy Place once a year, to offer the blood of animals for the sins of himself and of the people. Christ only had to die once to take away our sins.

All this only made the people ceremonially clean, but Christ's blood cleanses our consciences of acts that lead to death, so that we might serve the living God! He died to set us free from sin.

"Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him." (Hebrews 9:28)

Also, Jesus has a resurrection body, where the mortal is clothed with immortality, other people who were raised from the dead only had their mortal bodies back again.

-----------------------

Also, I know this isn't to do with the OP, but you posted some questions in Christian Apologetics and it was unfortunately deleted, I was going to reply but as I was about to hit the button, the thread got locked. Forgive me, if it helps I'll post you the answers here,

what was the fate of Judas?

Is it as matt says where he commits suicide, or is it as Acts says where he buys a field with the money

"(With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field;"
The Greek verb ktaomai, rendered purchased, has the form that means caused to be purchased.
In the original Greek it is this:
oun outos ektēsato chōrion misthou adikias genomenos prēnēs elakēsen mesos panta splanchna exechuthē
Literally rendered:
And so this to acquire a place wages unrighteousness to happen headlong to crack noisily in the midst all the inward parts to pour out.
In the original language it doesn't mention that Judas bought the field, only that his money acquired one.
"there he fell headlong,"
From a tree projecting over the the precipices of the Valley of Hinnom where he was hanging. http://bibleencyclopedia.com/places/Hakeldema_from_Hinnom_Valley.htm

"his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out."
He probably hung there for days, after "Then he went away and hanged himself." (Matthew 27:6) since it was before the Sabbath and the place was secluded. The process of decay causes gases to build up in the gut, so the impact from the fall would cause a corpse to burst open. It famously happened to the body of a sperm whale in Taiwan:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4096586/. [warning, contains picture of exploded whale!]
Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)" (Acts 1:18-19)

Was Jesus killed before or after passover?

John claims it was the day of prep where all others say it was the day after the feast.

"Amid conflicting views, I can only give what seems to me the best solution: (1) It is certain that Christ ate a meal the evening before in the Upper Room which was called a passover. (2) It is certain from Joh 18:28 that the Jews had not eaten the passover at that time. (3) It seems clear to me that Christ, anxious to eat this passover (see Lu 22:15), ate it in advance of the usual time, in order that he, the true Paschal Lamb, Our Passover (1Co 5:7) might be offered on the same day that the passover was eaten. The priests hurried the trial and execution of Jesus so that they might proceed to the preparation of the passover that evening. As the Lord's supper was anticipatory of the suffering on the cross, so was the Lord's last passover. The question has difficulties, but this view has fewer than any other." People's New Testament

what happened after the supposed resurrection?

Who went to see Jesus, one woman? two women? more? who did they meet? one angel? two? two soldiers?

This has been done by others more thoroughly than I can,
http://www.answering-islam.org/Andy/Resurrection/harmony.html
http://www.tektonics.org/harmonize/greenharmony.htm


Pleased to help - Jazmyn

 

[kidsagainstkows]

firstly i would claim that resurrection is not a unique idea. it takes place in Egyptian, Indian, Chinese, and greek and roman mythologies which predate Christianity. you act as though the ressurrection is important because people made it important after the fact. It seems clear to me that the followers of Jesus truly believed that he was resurrected, what is not clear is if Jesus was resurrected.

also the reason that society shunned early Christianity is because they were thought to be cannibals who "ate of the body and drank of the blood", not because they didnt leave their sick out to die.

also thanks jazmyn for uploading my first post ever i didnt realize at the time that that part was Christians only

reguarding Judas i usually call "errors in translation" cop outs but i use them to (Job didnt repent) so ill take it, thats also very interesting as i had never heard that before.

reguarding jesus' death i think that they specifically talk about the day of prep in the synoptics where Jesus sends the deciples to find a place for the meal. I know for certain that Jesus died on a friday (in all books) so he could not have died on the day of prep and the day after passover. alot of people give me the answer that the day is counted from sundown to sundown but that isnt correct either becuase the account is two days off.

i confess i have not read the last part yet but thank you for your response

for more contradictions i recommend profMTH's channel on youtube. he has several good series', one being called "brief bible blunders" they arnt all contradictions but they are pretty good.

 

[ebia]

firstly i would claim that resurrection is not a unique idea. it takes place in Egyptian, Indian, Chinese, and greek and roman mythologies which predate Christianity.

No it doesn't. That claim is often waved around, but what those other mythologies have is usually a cyclic death and rebirth, which is very different from resurrection, usually of a god not a human, and always in 'a land far, far, away', not "to this real, identifiable, human being at this identifiable place on this identifable date in the recent past witnessed by these people who are still hanging around'. The only religion that had an idea of resurrection was Judaism, and that understood it to be something that could only happen to all God's people at the end of time.

A cycle of death and rebirth of an Egyptian god (for instance) is different from resurrection in every way that matters.

you act as though the ressurrection is important because people made it important after the fact. It seems clear to me that the followers of Jesus truly believed that he was resurrected, what is not clear is if Jesus was resurrected.

As N.T. Wright has shown, there is no where for them to get the idea from if it didn't happen. They must have experienced both an empty tomb and encountered what they believed to be the physical Jesus walking, talking and eating with them to get that idea.

also the reason that society shunned early Christianity is because they were thought to be cannibals who "ate of the body and drank of the blood", not because they didnt leave their sick out to die.

They did sometimes make big deal out of that, but there are many quotes of astonishment about how moral they were as well. Their real reason for shunning them was neither, but because they were, like the Jews, "atheists". But that's another question. The point is that there are comments about how moral early Christian behaviour was, and that was a major draw-card. As it still is - churches that live as Kingdom communites grow.

 

[catzrfluffy]

firstly i would claim that resurrection is not a unique idea. it takes place in Egyptian, Indian, Chinese, and greek and roman mythologies which predate Christianity. you act as though the ressurrection is important because people made it important after the fact. It seems clear to me that the followers of Jesus truly believed that he was resurrected, what is not clear is if Jesus was resurrected.

Resurrection is in a few other religions, but was it taken as far, and was so central and important, as it was in the spread of Christianity?

"For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead.'" (Acts 17:31)

I think the acts of the apostles after His death and the accounts given in the gospels can't really be explained any other way, it would be insane to profess such a thing under sentence of death.

There is a difference between Jesus' resurrection and other resurrections, I found this article analysed them: Didn't Christianity Borrow From Other Religions?

also the reason that society shunned early Christianity is because they were thought to be cannibals who "ate of the body and drank of the blood", not because they didnt leave their sick out to die.

The view of cannibalism was more slander to try and give extra reason for putting early Christians to death in horrific ways, see "justification" for persecuting anyone.

also thanks jazmyn for uploading my first post ever i didnt realize at the time that that part was Christians only

That's ok quite a few people make that mistake.

reguarding jesus' death i think that they specifically talk about the day of prep in the synoptics where Jesus sends the deciples to find a place for the meal. I know for certain that Jesus died on a friday (in all books) so he could not have died on the day of prep and the day after passover. alot of people give me the answer that the day is counted from sundown to sundown but that isnt correct either becuase the account is two days off.

The day of preparation before the Sabbath is given in all books, no Fridays.

There were two Sabbaths, a High Sabbath and a normal Sabbath, it mentions the special one in John,

"Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jews did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down." (John 19:31)

Day of prep. for the High Sabbath on a Wednesday, - death and crucifixion
then the special Sabbath on a Thursday,
then the day of preparation Friday,
then the normal Sabbath Saturday,
then the first day of the week Sunday.

It was a view held by the apostles and passed on to the early church in Judea till Rome's take on it won out.

"And when the blessed Polycarp was at Rome in the time of Anicetus, and they disagreed a little about certain other things, they immediately made peace with one another, not caring to quarrel over this matter (the days and dates of the Lord's death, burial, and resurrection). For neither could Anicetus persuade Polycarp not to observe what he had always observed with John the disciple of our Lord, and the other apostles with whom he had associated; neither could Polycarp persuade Anicetus to observe it as he said that he ought to follow the customs of the presbyters that had preceded him."
CHURCH FATHERS: Church History, Book V (Eusebius)

 

[kidsagainstkows]

that's very interesting, you still say that because resurrection is important, it happened when this is not necessarily true. as i stated before it seems clear that the deciples believed christ rose, its not clear that he actually did it. keep in mind that the bible was not written by eye witnesses it is all hearsay in regards to christ (some of the letters are verified to be written by paul). in fact, matt and luke used mark as a source.

i had never heard your explanation of that so i thank you for showing it to me.